(Photo by Sasha Blaes/Clinton Foundation. Left to right, John in DC from Americablog; young fellow from Clinton Foundation that I did not meet personally (sorry!); Jay Carson, Clinton Foundation press secretary; former President Bill Clinton; and Peter Daou.)

It turns out that Bill Clinton got started reading blogs by his daughter, who told him that he really needed to check out the independent reporting and analysis that was being done on the web. And he did…and, according to Peter Daou, who did much of the coordination for the meeting, President Clinton really loves reading blogs. Who knew?!?

So, the call came in last week with the invitation to go up to New York and meet with the Big Dawg — but we were asked to keep the meeting off the record, it was just going to be a meet and greet, no more than an hour…your basic, "Hello, you know I’m out there, I know you’re out there, perhaps we can do something together in the future." sort of thing.

Jane and I decided to go — as if a meeting with a former President is something you just blow off (that would be rude!) – and we wanted to emphasize the need for better messaging and coordination/cooperation with blogs and the Democratic leadership, who seem to constantly be trying to work at cross-purposes with all of us. (Hello?!? We’re here to help, and we aren’t charging you a dime for it — and we actually care if you win, unlike some of the consultant rat holes you keep pouring your money into every election cycle. Wake up!)

As you might imagine in a meeting with a former President and a policy wonk like Bill Clinton, we did a lot of listening to start things off. Interrupting a former President takes a little getting used to, for me at least — momma beat those manners into me a little more than usual, maybe. But after the first moments of shock when he walked into the room and that part of your brain that tracks celebrity gossip started going off "OMG! That really IS Bill Clinton!"…and he looks just the same in person as you see on teevee…we got down to business and started talking shop.

Which, for all of the folks in the room, turned out to be one huge wonk festival, as you might imagine.

With lots of disagreement and talking over each other, including, on occasion, talking over Bill Clinton. Because the weird thing was, after we started digging into our lunches and talking shop, that whole "former President" veneer sort of slid away for all of us, but the issues about which we all care, and debate, and haggle, and argue, and the rest — those were there for all of us, and that’s what we dug into for more than two hours.

Jeralyn has covered a number of the topics we discussed, and I’m sure several of you have read through her post, so I don’t want to re-invent the wheel here. But there were a couple of topics that I wanted to hit that Jane and I emphasized — emphatically at times — because this was an opportunity to get a message beyond Bill Clinton to the entrenched party apparatus and we were not going to miss out on a messaging moment because Miss Manners might prefer a more demure luncheon attitude. (Screw that!)

(Photo by Sasha Blaes/Clinton Foundation. From left to right: Jeralyn’s son’s head; a little of McJoan from DailyKos; Jane Hamsher of FDL; and Matt Stoller of MyDD.)

As you can see in the above photo, Jane wasn’t shy about speaking her mind. (As if…) And she spent some time during the meeting emphasizing the lack of coordinated message and how much more effective the party could be if they would work with — instead of against — us. The ABC/Disney movie work was a great example of the synergy that can be created when the blogs and the party and various individual interests all get on the same page and push something important to all of us.

Imagine where that could take us for the elections in November.

And while President Clinton has faith in the abilities of Rahm Emmanuel and Chuck Schumer, I made clear to Jay Carson, his press secretary, that both Schumer and Emmanuel have been dismissive and rude to bloggers when we have offered assitance, or critique, or information — and that this attitude needed adjustment for the greater good of the entire party. That what we all want is a Democratic win, and that we were willing to work with them toward that — but they had to be willing to listen to criticism when we were getting an overwhelming message from our readers that they are doing something wrong. (Didn’t get a chance to say that to President Clinton, but Jay was attentive and interested in the examples that I gave him of specific instances with both men, and promised to see what they could do to…um…rectify the situation.)

I thought both Jane and Matt Stoller made excellent points with regard to messaging failures in the Democratic party and the need for better talking heads to represent us all on the news shows. And the need for much better preparation for those shows. We have offered, in the past, to put together prep information — specifically on the CIA leak case, because Jane and I have been so steeped in the minutiae and the facts and bigger picture implications — but no one has ever taken me up on the offers (can’t speak for Jane on that).

I mean, honestly, how hard is it to task someone on your staff to Google for a couple of hours to put together some summary papers on issues you know will be hit on a Sunday show? Or to e-mail a blogger who specializes in a particular issue and ask for help? In case anyone is wondering: we would be more than happy to be helpful — and we’d actually be discreet and prompt, because it’s just the sort of people we are.

(Photo by Sasha Blaes/Clinton Foundation. Left to right, Jeralyn’s son — isn’t he a cutie? – and me, talking with my hands, as usual.)

We got to talk a bit about poverty, race, and class issues — specifically regarding some of the criminal enforcement issues that have risen to the surface via mandatory minimum sentences and the bass-ackwards way that we approach crime in this country. This is a pet issue of mine, and is one of the reasons I stopped practicing law because I couldn’t stand being a short-term band-aid any longer to problems which need serious, long-term political solutions — and I wanted to be able to work toward that somehow. Jeralyn and I have both seen the effects first-hand of a criminal system designed to give political points to elected officials who get to act "tough on crime," while really only making things worse in a whole lot of ways. I hope we can have more conversations about this issue in the Democratic party in the months to come, because it is a huge problem.

The transcript of the on-the-record portion of the meeting isn’t yet available, but when we get it, I’ll update if there is something that I’ve missed here.

All in all, I thought it was a good first meeting. President Clinton was clearly in meet and greet mode, but so were we, so it worked out well. Where things go from here, if anywhere, is anyone’s guess — but this is an excellent opportunity for blogs and politicians to become much more comfortable with each other in the Democratic party. The GOP has been using this communications medium to its advantage for quite a while, and it is high time we levelled the playing field — but bloggers cannot do that by themselves, the elected officials have to start playing ball. And I hope that Clinton’s example of a reach-out will move that along.

Now for the dish: during my travel to NYC, a bottle of saline solution opened up in my luggage and drenched everything around it, including my straightening iron for my hair. I woke up the morning of the meeting, turned on my iron and hopped in the shower, only to start smelling this burning plastic smell. Eeep! Thankfully, I had put another dryer in the bag as well as a just in case, but I had to go to the meeting with less than smooth hair. Oh well.

Rode over to the meeting with McJoan, who I absolutely adore. President Clinton was running late from a prior meeting, so all the bloggers headed down the street to a Starbucks to hang out until he arrived.

Lunch was fantastic. A local caterer brought in some great food: Southern-style baked chicken (no fried food for Clinton since the heart issue), spinach with a little ham hock, baked sweet potato fries, yummy cornbread, salad and fruit. And for dessert, we had red velvet cake with cream cheese frosting.

Bill Cinton was wearing a very well tailored suit, and a blue shirt with very tiny white pinstripes — the blue was the exact color of his eyes. (Someone has a good eye that is doing his tailoring.) He wore a deeper blue tie, and looked like he was enjoying himself as he talked to everyone around the table.

All in all, I think the bloggers enjoyed themselves. It was an interesting meeting, and one that I’m sure we’ll all be dissecting in some way for a while — there are a number of ways this can move forward (or not), and the question is which of them will he, and we, choose. We live in interesting times…

(Huge thank you to Twisted Martini, who helped me with my picture downloads late last night. Couldn’t have done this post without your help!)

217 Responses
to “I Went To New York This Week…”

I cannot confirm, but a diary over at Kos reports that the latest Rasmussen is in for CT – and it is good news for Lamont after those other (questionable) polls showing him behind by double digits. I have cut and pasted the diary below:

Rasmussen has just come out with a new poll behind the subscription wall, but since these polls are put out there
i figure it`s ok to give the results.
Rasmussen has this race a dead heat

LIEBERMAN 45
LAMONT 43

Now all other polls show Lieberman with a double digit lead
so it`s a question who to believe. I think Rasmussen has a pretty good record with state polls.

Quick OT: CNN interviewing Mitch McConnell just now about the detainee interrogation program. Funny how all the nice Republicans call everybody patriots when the disagreement goes public in their own ranks…

Bush is holding a press avail this morning at 11:15. So here’s what I want to know. How can you with specificity say the detainee interrogation program and the torture tactics you want the Congress to sanction have stopped another terrorist attack.

I haven’t had any elephants in my backyard in the last five years…is it because my cocker spaniels are such effective elephant chasers?

Or maybe they’ve picked other backyards?

Like, Spain. Or Great Britain. How can you, Bush, justify conflating the torture tactics you want to use with the fact that we haven’t been attacked in the last five years. What attacks have you specifically halted? If you can’t tell us, which Senators can confirm your bluster? The Bushaholics? Or credible speakers?

After reading Clinton’s biography, I’m not at all surprised that he reads blogs – it fits in with the information sponge personality that comes through the book. So, on the off chance that he’s reading here . . .

Hi, Bill! Glad you made the effort to pull this gathering together. You – and the Democratic party – won’t be sorry.

tommy yum at 13 — You know, I’m not certain what the answer is to that question, honestly. It’s tough to tell at this stage whether it’s a co-opting the blogs for their purposes or a synergistic partnership or what. And, honestly, he can’t speak for everyone in the party, so what he and his supporters want isn’t necessarily what someone else wants. It’s a very dynamic situation — and it presupposes that we’ll just go along with what they want, which is NOT a given. I’m just sort of taking a wait-and-see approach on this. It could prove very helpful for the Democratic party for all of us to work together on issues where we can find common ground — we saw that clearly with the recent fight with ABC/Disney where they weren’t expecting any fight from the left and ended up having to edit the movie at the last minute and back down on their claims of anything beyond biased truthiness. It was serendipitous that the meeting occurred so close on the heels of all of that — having been scheduled well before that fight got going — and I think Clinton was appreciative of us having his back, without having had to have been asked to do so. So we started the meeting on more of a peer footing than we otherwise would have, I think, which is a good thing for the bloggers.

Wow Christy, what a day! I am so heartened by this–it does make one feel like “someone” cares, that they are willing to listen.

If any of you folks from the Clinton Foundation (or Chelsea or “someone”) are reading this, to follow up on the points Christy made about the lame-assed Dem talking heads (I mean Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi — like embarrassing performance by Reid on the PBS Jim Lehrer Newshour the other night) that get sent out on our behalf (because Christy is right on, we do desperately want Dem victories); stop dumbing shit down!!!! Find some people (actually Big Dawg is great on this score) who know how to speak intelligently to the issues that we all care about, who can do it in normal conversational english, and who can do it with passion.

We, the people . . . are. Not. Stupid. If we wanted to be treated like children, we would’ve become republicans along time ago.

Please ditch the Joe Klein patronizing attitude. And the robotic Pelosi ‘talking points’ style. And find spokespeople who can think and speak on their feet, who are willing to take the time to become well informed on issues that really matter.

And who have the courage and the confidence to speak with passion and conviction. Like Ann Richards (God bless her soul), Mario Cuomo and even Al Gore when he has freed himself of his handler’s shackles.

Love me now, hate me later! Personally, after spending day after day comping vocals, mixing, cutting custom backing vocal tracks and watching new iterations of the video, I’m a little toasty on the track. But I never listen to my own records anyway.

I’m so glad to see some thawing between the bloggers (and blog readers, by extension) and the party entrenchees. There has seemed to be an artificial “war” where our observations, information, and labor are brushed off with a “shut up and stick to voting and donating”.

You’re so right that the effort against “The Path to 9/11″ was a beautiful example of concerted effort.

And leave it to Big Dog to see the light and take action. I view it as a very hopeful sign!

Thanks for your debriefing, Christy. [and Twisted, for the tech!]. This meeting may become the tipping point that actually gets the one-way roads of the estabDems interacting and working with the bloggers for maximum positive change and effect.

A synergistic moment indeed. Bridge to the future, even.

Thanks, Christy and Jane, for being our guiding lights on this boulder-strewn road. Will be exciting to watch this unfold participate in building the synergy even more.

op99 at 28 — You know, I had done that, but I had to pull the saline out to clean off my lens after I got something under it on the train, and I put it back into the luggage without bothering to stick it in the bag. (Ooops. Won’t do THAT again. Hello, dry cleaners…)

No doubt, Clinton is an impressive dude. A few years ago he paid a visit to some of my family members in Hong Kong (they’re high-profile academics, which over there is something of a celebrity status warranting photo ops with prominent dignitaries and such). Despite disagreements with some of his policy positions, everyone present was uniformly impressed by his broad intellect and, of course, his legendary charisma. They also thought he was a good listener, which was a big compliment and a bit of a surprise to me.

Sounds like your exchange was definitely a step in the right direction. I’m just thankful “we” had someone like you there to represent.

And I’m glad you enjoyed NYC (I’m a commuter from CT, my day job’s in Manhattan — was the food from Sylvia’s?) Oh, and tangentially I’m also pleased that NYC’s coffee culture is expanding…!

Kai at 34 — it was a very interactive meeting — he is a great listener, very sharp and focused on the points that he wants to make, but also willing to consider a counter-point from someone else who has differing opinion, weigh it out and think about how it might change his own thoughts on the issue. (You know, something we rarely see from Bush. SIGH) It was an intriguing meeting in a number of ways.

Oh, and it wasn’t from Sylvia’s, it was a new restaurant whose name I didn’t catch. But the chef came along to serve, and she was so fun — we talked cooking for a few minutes before Clinton came into the room, and I lamented that we weren’t having collard greens instead of spinach. *G* The cornbread was awesome!

Oh, yes, Brian Lamb is trying to rehabilitate Novak. Like pinning water on the wall. To a caller, “Are you calling (dear old) Bob a liar”? I said, “Well, yeah.” Bob knows it was a Democrat asking the question appearing in Republican’s clothing.

Bob always looks like a big fat toad sitting on a leaf croaking about the horror of capital gain taxes. Apologies to my Mom who tried to teach me not to make fun of people.

tommy yum at 32 — well, I’m pretty sure that the Lamont victory had a LOT to do with Jane and I being included. *g*

But not everything. The rapidity of the ABC crock-u-drama response was one example of a stellar FDL performance. Extremely focused and successful. I also think that anyone who has been following the Plame-betrayal case would also be impressed–it would be interesting to know if the Lewinsky brouhaha would’ve even happened if there had been a blogosphere back then checking up on every last little piece of bs that came out of Starr’s office going back to Whitewater and the Paula Jones-Ann Coulter frivolous lawsuit. And holding the MSM’s feet to the fire for stooping to tabloid-level journalism (we are still the laughing stock of the civilized world over that).

OMG, only a very brilliant Christy Hardin Smith would have the foresight to travel with TWO hairdryers.! You have amazing hair, you look incredibly gorgeous as always. And Jane, love the dress. I’m sorry it was such a pain to get these photos up, but you know FDL is going to save you. Twisted, you are the one.

Sounds like a lovely chat. And a necessary one. I want to thank you for hammering home the point about cooperation. We really, really need that right now. So many of us are feeling that we have the time and the energy and could help in some way, but there is so much cross-talk, it’s hard to sort out what’s going on. Wouldn’t it be wonderful to have many more roundtables such as this with all of the leadership? And yes, please – is there anybody listening? – find a new lineup for the talking head shows. Help!

However, that’s a mighty white group of people in the picture who met with Bill. I know there are plenty of minority bloggers–Steve Gilliard & Pam Spaulding are two who come immediately to mind–how come they’re missing? Anyone ask Peter Daou since he coordinated the meeting?

Tommy — in 1962 I was working as a bdcst engr when Birch Bayh (Evan’s Dad) ran for Senate. He used a jingle “Hey look him over – he’s your kind of guy…” based on a pop tune from the period. The damn thing was played over and over. Bdcst folk hated it but it worked!

A coupla years ago I was at a big public event honoring the real Senator Bayh — others praised the jingle but I told him how to this day I still loathe it.

One of the many dismaying revelations I had about “the biz” was when I was told that the big Clear Channel stations had done “burn out” polling on our single. In other words, they figured out how often they could play it before a majority of listeners couldn’t stand it anymore. Which they proceeded to do. I mean, fuck, I love “Strawberry Fields Forever” but don’t play it ten times a day!

The whole point of the track was to be viral. If I had actually expressed my feelings in music it would have sounded a lot more like “White Light/White Heat” (Velvet Underground) than a pop song. Or a primal scream therapy session! It wasn’t really intended to preach to the choir; it was meant as the spoonful of sugar, for to help the medicine go down.

Corrine at 46 — there were also several people who appeared by phone. The meeting was put together in a week and a half’s time (I barely was able to coordinate travel plans and The Peanut, frankly, because Mr. ReddHedd had to rearrange his schedule at the last minute.) There were a number of female bloggers physically there, which was great — Kos couldn’t make it because of prior commitments, and I know there were others who were also invited who couldn’t make it either. So don’t make assumptions based solely on four photos that I pulled — especially when I don’t have complete information on who was on the call (John Amato from C&L and Glenn Greenwald were on, I know, but I’m not certain if and who others might have been.). For a first meeting put together on the fly, I thought Peter put together a great group of people who were very passionate about the issues and willing to speak their minds. And I’m certain, if there are more meetings in the future, that others will be included.

Too early to open the FDL martini lounge, so I’ll buy everyone a gubba goffee (how they say it in NY.)

never too early. I’ll have mine with an olive.

Actually, I think I’ll pass on that one (my stomach cannot bear the thought of straight anything at this hour) but since it is a dark, rainy, cloudy day, maybe a very spicy bloody mary with lots of garlic stuffed olives wouldn’t be so bad!

Too early to open the FDL martini lounge, so I’ll buy everyone a gubba goffee (how they say it in NY.)

never too early. I’ll have mine with an olive.

Actually, I think I’ll pass on that one (my stomach cannot bear the thought of straight anything at this hour) but since it is a dark, rainy, cloudy day, maybe a very spicy bloody mary with lots of garlic stuffed olives wouldn’t be so bad!

The issue for the Dems is that the bloggers on our side of the aisle are emphatically not mouthpieces for the leadership. Nor are they media outlets that can be bought like TV or print adspace. Nor are they sycophants.

FDL and the others at that meeting are able to do networked research, writing, distribution and action without the help of any Beltline consultants. While Clinton is talking to the bloggers, the Beltway boys are murmuring words of fear in a Greek chorus off stage. “Their way lies radicalism. If you listen to the bloggers, the whole party will become marginalized.” What they really mean is that their business model is becoming obsolete, and they are scared.

The blogs won’t work as a cheap substitute for consultants. Then the pols won’t get honesty: the bloggers will tell them what they want to hear.

The pols need to buy expensive ads from the blogs and leave the brilliant work to the bloggers and their devoted coteries.

One of the things that makes me so mad is that the conversation on TV, and the rest of the media for that matter, is that there is no conversation. I mean no offense to sports fans, but all those locker room interviews? You’ve seen one, you’ve seen them all. How does it feel to win? Are you feeling bad about your loss? How do you think you played today? And the answers are always the same. It feels great! It feels bad, but we’ll be back another day. It’s just the same conversation every time. And it is the same with the Sunday talking head shows. All the lame softball questions and the predictable non-answer cover your ass canned responses. It’s not a conversation, it’s a ritual. With very, very few exceptions, it’s devolved to a dance without music that no one in their right mind believes is genuine. That is why Colbert and Stewart are so brilliant and so revered. It’s unpredictable and fresh.

Christy — a quick drive by to alert you, if you did not already see it, that there is a stunning lead editorial in the NYT today on the detainee/tribunal legislation. It is the best article I’ve seen in the MSM and in both detail and analysis goes well beyond the best reporting I’ve seen in the “news” articles, let alone cable TV commentary. It could have been written by Glenn Greenwald.

This needs spotlighting, either via a post by GG (haven’t checked yet) or by FDL. Regrettably, it can’t be easily copied or dissemimated because it is behind the wall — the best argument I’ve seen for why that policy is self defeating — so if GG doesn’t cover this, perhaps . . .?

George W. Bush on TV at 11:15??? On the west coast, that’s 8:15am. That is just way too early for that kind of nonsense. Is this about the torture duel he wants to have with Congress? Will he finally lose his marbles on national television? Should we watch in the hope?

Great stuff here, especially the discussion of Democratic political leaders turning to bloggers for prep backgrounders and talking points for the talking head shows. This really should be a no-brainer, but the fact that it’s not shows too much about how insecure and territorial many Hill staffers are — I’ve seen this having worked for a couple of major Dem politicians in the mid-1980s to mid-1990s — that they would rather give mediocre, safe, conventional ideas that they produce than go to someone who inevitably has been spending more time learning and thinking about a particular issue (like you all and emptywheel on Plame) than they ever could.

Of course it’s also a matter of the signals the politicians sends about what they want — one of the guys I worked for was Mario Cuomo, who was very comfortable with combative stuff as long as it was well grounded (and he of course made far more effective use of that grounding than we had done in what we gave him) — but most good Democratic politicians will be open to a strong case for a tougher point of view if you back it up and have thought it through well enough. We’ve seen Reid take lines from bloggers, to good effect.

What I wanted to ask you was this — in the meeting with Clinton, did you all talk about or get any indirect sense that he gets how the core mission of Republicans since 1994 has become to destroy Democrats and destroy our constitutional system? If there’s one thing that’s most infuriating to most bloggers and their readers, it’s to see how we’re not in the relatively comfortable political world of the pre-Clinton impeachment (which really started in the 104th Congress) era yet most Hill Democrats — Lieberman is by far the worst example of this, but the ethos is pervasive — seem to be behaving as if they were still in some collegial world of consensus-oriented policy-making and dealing with Republicans like Everitt Dirksen and Bob Michel. Reid seems to get it but is, it seems, too modest, self-effacing, and self-contained to disabuse his Democratic colleagues of their delusions. Clinton is so widely respected for at least his political smarts by just about all Democrats that he could be very effective in privately conveying this awareness, which potentially can drive all else in political strategy. Do you think he gets it, or that you all in concert could convey this message to him, and that he could be open to raising awareness on the Hill about it?

Obviously he would not want to be very public about this as it would backfire with the media’s corporate stenographers as being incompatible with the dignity of a former President, but he certainly could send powerful messages in private — especially to his former staff like Rahm Emanuel.

Citizen Hardin Smith, it’s great that the upper crust a the progressive blogosphere had audience with Monsignor Big Dog (but where was Blogenfeurer Kos??!!). But did any of you temper your enthusiasm with a bit of wariness with regard to potential “cooption” by the Clintonian tool and die machine. Both Clintons are not only creatures of the DLC, they are by some measure, the next generation of DLC so it would seem that one would wanna have their shit detectors in full operation when dealin’ with ‘em.

I would think that if Clinton really wanned to advance the blogosphere into the mainstream of Democratic Party action-decisionmaking, he could do it in a heart beat but would necessarily lose the potential to coopt it into Hilary’s empire. The cudos to Rahm E and Chuck The Bookeeper are, IMO, very telling about how powerful the tail is on the Big Dog.

But, GEEZE LouEEZE, it is so great that you and Jane were amongst ‘em…did you read the peans to you two gals yesterday in the context of Ann Richards and Barbara Jordon. I want to add my voice to those who proposed that you and Jane are this generation’s Richards and Jordon…I know this father hopes his two daughters will walk on your paths for a mile or two.

…It’s a very dynamic situation — and it presupposes that we’ll just go along with what they want, which is NOT a given…

That’s important to me, that the left blogosphere doesn’t become just an echo chamber/megaphone for the party establishment. Sure, use each other when interests coincide, but with eyes wide open.

I was thinking the same thing. I hope they recognize that we’re a powerful force because we’re intelligent, independent agents, not a top-down message machine like much of the right blogosphere. We do have an advantage in that there’s a model for this — liberal interest groups (however ineffective they are of late) and now MoveOn, DFA, etc., are recognized by the party to have their own agenda that works in congruence but not lockstep with the party. If the leadership can be made to understand that our more dynamic ad-hoc organizations have an element of that, and aren’t just groups of volunteers and contributors to be directed, I think it’ll help us work together.

George W. Bush on TV at 11:15??? On the west coast, that’s 8:15am. That is just way too early for that kind of nonsense. Is this about the torture duel he wants to have with Congress? Will he finally lose his marbles on national television? Should we watch in the hope?

It gets worse, at least here in the Bay Area. Darth Cheney is flying in for a fundraiser on the Peninsula this afternoon, which is guaranteed to screw up the PM commute for folks there.

I sense disruption in the Force, Luke . . . Scary, it is, and cold.

And on a Friday afternoon, at that. Of course, considering the guest of honor, that may be the intentional point.

CHS -> I’m very heartened to read this. I’ve been wondering whether there has been any reaching out -any liasons- between the Dem power structure and the ambassadors from Blogistan. That the powers that be see the necessity for such outreach and that it was with someone as powerful and politically astute as the Big Dog is a very welcome sign and a tangible showing that: a) he gets it; and b) they recognize that the NetRoots is a vital and entrenched cauldron of power.

I’m so glad to see the line-up. I can’t think of anyone I’d prefer to see at such a meeting. I’ve been concerned due to the enmity – much of it earned- that seems to exist between the DLC and the progressive tribes. We’ve villified each other ruthlessly…probably earned, but still I think there has to be a recognition that we need to discover shared interests. If we can’t develop working respect and mutual admiration, we can, at the least, learn to cut hard bargains and deals with each other that serve to help us all accomplish our goals.

I see no reason why any part of a meeting like this should be off the record. Giving people “private” information is the easiest way to start to co-opt them. It is a pattern the the mainstream media has gotten into and they get played all the time because of it.

Let’s not fall into this trap. Once you hear something off the record you then need to self-censor yourself ever after. Bloggers represent the public, and therefore their should be no secrets.

Next time such a situation comes up excuse yourselves from that portion of the meeting or demand that everything be public.

There is an echo in here…I said last night that I thought next week (or this weekend’s) Lamont pollin would show even better’n the 46-42 that Zogby projected. I still think that this is Lamont’s race to lose and that he’s gunna hafta get caught on tape committin’ a high crime of immorality in the street for Joe Likuderman to win.

KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITION THIS WAR AIN’T OVER BY A LONG SHOT!!!

Fresh outta mod at 296 last thread, you’ll find something to file under “We Have Our Research and Goopers Have Theirs.”

It’s a Stratfor report called “Iraq: The Policy Dilemma,” preceded by an explanation of how I came into it and what I then found out about Stratfor, a private “strategic intell” provider to Gooper wanting to consider themselves mucky-mucks. The report itself is well-written but flimsy-ish compared to the pro bono thinking we have here.

I can see some distrust and wariness, but it would be so easy for them to begin to pick up on some synergy from the blogs without necessarily locking themselves in to “on the record” exchanges that they worry may come back and haunt them later or be provocative if publicized.

Sending out some topics at intervals and having bloggers send responses – just as a data sampling, not as a locked set of position points; keeping a list of expertise for quick research etc.

I’m very glad you mentioned the fact that a different set of talking heads is needed for the shows. Plus – you guys take great pictures.

*ilson — yeah, there’s no question Clinton understood very well what was going on against him, but that was personal, and couldn’t be seen by anyone as systemic with the Republicans at that point because it was the first big example (starting with the Whitewater and Paula Jones garbage, that was all of a piece — impeachment was just the last act).

IOW, does he view impeachment as a one-off that he understands and was concerned about because it was against him personally, or does he see it as the first rocks in what has become an avalanche of Republican attacks on our constitutional system?

It gets worse, at least here in the Bay Area. Darth Cheney is flying in for a fundraiser on the Peninsula this afternoon, which is guaranteed to screw up the PM commute for folks there.

Heh. A couple of weeks ago, Bush was going down to George Allen’s home for a fundraiser, and apparently his people asked Virginia officials if they could close the carpool lanes of the main southbound highway from DC for six hours, including most of evening rush hour. (The state officials talked sense into them, and he took a helicopter.) These people don’t care how many peasants they trample on their rides; to them, we’re only here to shout their praises.

OT Question about Ney -> Is it a likelihood that DOJ has gone along with the plea agreement in exchange for Ney’s cooperation with others? Would they typically be entering into an agreement without his willingness to talk?

If that’s the case, this is very heartening news. If I’m not mistaken, most of Ney’s underlings have already plead. This would mean that Ney would be helping to nail other Congress critters or -perhaps- those in leadership above him.

I’m w/ Norske on the co-option potential here, and as robert feinman mentions, the use of ‘off the record’ is one way to start that ball rolling. Perhaps I’m too sick of all the secrecy in the Bush administration, but remember, we don’t want to be like them.

For those following Bush’s attempt to legalize war crimes, I recommend this posting by Marty Lederman over at Balkinization. It’s the first rational explanation I’ve seen of the differences between the administration’s bill and the McCain, Warner, Graham vesion that got the endorsement of the Armed Services Committee yesterday.

Apparently the President has made noises that if he doesn’t get provisions limiting the scope of Geneva Common 3– also known as the right to “alternative sets of procedures” (the prisoner abuse that dare not speak its name)– he will veto the bill. Let’s see now, preventing stem cell research and protecting the right to torture-lite– yes, I can certainly see why those are the two things sufficiently important in the world that George W. Bush would threaten a veto.

[…] The key problem, as Marty points out, is that the Administration has simply been unwilling to admit to what it has done and what it would like to keep on doing– in the name of protecting freedom and human rights, of course.

robertdfeinman at 75 — well, thanks for sharing but you’ll pardon me if I live in the real world where blabbing every little thing can give the other side an advantage that I’d rather not give them, given they already have a massive messaging advantage as it is. Nothing that was said in the off the record portion came as a surprise to me, but it still is not something that should be blabbed around because, well, sometimes discussions about strategic options or personal opinions about individual public figures or whatever the issue that is publicly controversial — it’s good to be able to have a frank, open, honest discussion instead of couching everything in public, masked language and talking in code. I do enough deciphering between the lines of NYTimes and WaPo article quotes as it is.

Jeebus, this isn’t some sort of tin foil hat meeting where we all bow down and vow to do everything Clinton tells us to do, for hell’s sakes. Every blogger in that room was a strong, professional individual who had their eyes wide open. They would not have invited us otherwise, frankly, because they don’t need to bother with the full treatment for sycophants. This was a fairly frank discussion for a first step — but it was just a first step. And there will be more off the record portions of discussion with people in the future — because it is simply how things work. Period. But neither Jane nor I plan on handing over the keys any time soon — we both like driving, thank you very much.

First, bloggers are individuals. They are not representatives of the public; they ARE the public, but not as an aggregate. They do as they see fit.

Second, this meeting clearly had a political component, and not unlike business, some of politics is proprietary and confidential. This was NOT a publicly-funded meeting between elected officials, but a private meeting between individuals in a private venue with a limited amount of proprietary information exchanged. The information exchanged could also be highly personal — like the status of any possible lawsuit being contemplated by Clinton against ABC-Disney. If I were talking with the Clinton Foundation and Bill Clinton about this specific matter, I would expect standard practice to include execution of a Non-Disclosure Agreement.

Why don’t you save your fire for George Bush, an elected official, who has had numerous closed door private discussions off the record with journalists? Why aren’t you asking about Jeff Gannon-Guckert’s access to the publicly-owned White House? Or ask about any of the elected or appointed Senior Administration Officials who had access to Valerie Wilson Plame’s identity and status and disclosed it in violation of law?

Jeepers. Keep the eyes on the ball — and on the right one.

moe99 — ditto the above for you.

What’s with the concern all of a sudden, from folks who aren’t frequent commenters? And especially concern about Jane and Christy — women who CLEARLY are independent in thought and intense in analytical capacity?

Norske has a great point — remember, Daou is not just a blogger at the meeting, he works for Hillary. I am sure he was smart enough to figure out there is huge and appropriate resistance to Hillary and that the best way to smooth some of that over is to bring out her secret weapon — the Big Dog. This meeting seem to have worked well as a way to get bloggers to feel that they are part of the insider group, rather than external agitators.

I am as big a yellow dog dem as they come. But, there will be increasing pressure for us to do what is deemed best for the party rather than what is best for the country. The Darkblack Lieberman image keffluffle ought to stand as a cautionary tale for what happens when one combines independent blogs and party politics.

They will admit nothing and they will give up on nothing. This is a fight to the death. The Cheney Administration will have it’s way with us no matter how much we protest. It’s called rape. Plain and simple.

OT Question about Ney -> Is it a likelihood that DOJ has gone along with the plea agreement in exchange for Ney’s cooperation with others? Would they typically be entering into an agreement without his willingness to talk?

If that’s the case, this is very heartening news. If I’m not mistaken, most of Ney’s underlings have already plead. This would mean that Ney would be helping to nail other Congress critters or -perhaps- those in leadership above him.

This is a very important question — we learned AFTYER his plea, that DOJ received no cooperation agreement from Cunningham. Very bad prosecuting there. So, is it payback the friend or root out corruption? We will soon know. If Ney is sentenced at the same time as his plea — no cooperation deal exists.

FDL and the others at that meeting are able to do networked research, writing, distribution and action without the help of any Beltline consultants. While Clinton is talking to the bloggers, the Beltway boys are murmuring words of fear in a Greek chorus off stage. “Their way lies radicalism. If you listen to the bloggers, the whole party will become marginalized.” What they really mean is that their business model is becoming obsolete, and they are scared.

I agree there’s an element of that, but there’s also a somewhat legitimate practical concern. Campaigns are used to controlling everything, and a campaign can be seriously affected or even decided by a bad slip-up. So while more decentralized model of working with well-intentioned people like us can be powerful (as we’ve seen), it also carries a very real element of greater risk. That’s why we’ve tended to see greater coordination with bloggers by underdog campaigns (Dean, Lamont, Webb.)

Perhaps the best way to deal with that is to get them to understand that we’re going to be out here doing what we do whether they work with us or not, and if some of us do something that ends up looking bad, the Republican are going to try to hang it around their necks either way. So the degree to which they can minimize that risk by not associating with is us small, and the benefit if they do work with is can be much greater.

Right on, no more off the record bullshit…but that’s how the franchise players work. The off the record stuff becomes the fence that cuts off the ring and isolates the information seekers and disseminators. Love the big dog but don’t trust ‘im with the silver (or yer daughter).

KEEP THE FAITH AND BELIEVE NONE A WHAT YOU HEAR AND ONLY HALF A WHATCHA SEE!!!

Let’s hope this is a good sign of what the future may bring. And remember for every voice here in the comments,most likely there a many more lurkers who may not voice or leave a comment because you or others have already done it much better.
Now your wrote,…but they had to be willing to listen to criticism when we were getting an overwhelming message from our readers that they are doing something wrong. (Didn’t get a chance to say that to President Clinton, but Jay was attentive and interested in the examples that I gave him of specific instances with both men, and promised to see what they could do to…um…rectify the situation.)

Care to share with us what the examples were? If not, I fully understand it was a private conversation but thought I’d ask anyway.

Lastly, imho sounds like you and Jane hit/emphasized the right message to them. Thank-you…you spoke for me too!

First, bloggers are individuals. They are not representatives of the public; they ARE the public, but not as an aggregate. They do as they see fit.

Second, this meeting clearly had a political component, and not unlike business, some of politics is proprietary and confidential. This was NOT a publicly-funded meeting between elected officials, but a private meeting between individuals in a private venue with a limited amount of proprietary information exchanged. The information exchanged could also be highly personal — like the status of any possible lawsuit being contemplated by Clinton against ABC-Disney. If I were talking with the Clinton Foundation and Bill Clinton about this specific matter, I would expect standard practice to include execution of a Non-Disclosure Agreement.

Why don’t you save your fire for George Bush, an elected official, who has had numerous closed door private discussions off the record with journalists? Why aren’t you asking about Jeff Gannon-Guckert’s access to the publicly-owned White House? Or ask about any of the elected or appointed Senior Administration Officials who had access to Valerie Wilson Plame’s identity and status and disclosed it in violation of law?

Jeepers. Keep the eyes on the ball — and on the right one.

moe99 — ditto the above for you.

What’s with the concern all of a sudden, from folks who aren’t frequent commenters? And especially concern about Jane and Christy — women who CLEARLY are independent in thought and intense in analytical capacity?

Mary at 78 is right. My fear is that the leftosphere will try to copy the right wing wurlitzer with complete synchronicity with the political party. That would be antithetical to everything I care about.

I can see some distrust and wariness, but it would be so easy for them to begin to pick up on some synergy from the blogs without necessarily locking themselves in to “on the record” exchanges that they worry may come back and haunt them later or be provocative if publicized.

Sending out some topics at intervals and having bloggers send responses – just as a data sampling, not as a locked set of position points; keeping a list of expertise for quick research etc.

I’m very glad you mentioned the fact that a different set of talking heads is needed for the shows. Plus – you guys take great pictures.

A bit of distrust and wariness is healthy. Like their SHOULD be between the 3 branches of the fed gov or even between the states and DC.

Having said that, it is unconsciounable that the DLCC types continue to hurl insults at the blogs — who are really just a loose network of *good* citizens, who are willing to participate in a democratic process.

OT Question about Ney -> Is it a likelihood that DOJ has gone along with the plea agreement in exchange for Ney’s cooperation with others? Would they typically be entering into an agreement without his willingness to talk?

If that’s the case, this is very heartening news. If I’m not mistaken, most of Ney’s underlings have already plead. This would mean that Ney would be helping to nail other Congress critters or -perhaps- those in leadership above him.

This is a very important question — we learned AFTYER his plea, that DOJ received no cooperation agreement from Cunningham. Very bad prosecuting there. So, is it payback the friend or root out corruption? We will soon know. If Ney is sentenced at the same time as his plea — no cooperation deal exists.

I see no reason why any part of a meeting like this should be off the record. Giving people “private” information is the easiest way to start to co-opt them. It is a pattern the the mainstream media has gotten into and they get played all the time because of it.

Let’s not fall into this trap. Once you hear something off the record you then need to self-censor yourself ever after. Bloggers represent the public, and therefore their should be no secrets.

Next time such a situation comes up excuse yourselves from that portion of the meeting or demand that everything be public.

I think this is a bit harsh. Clinton is not a public official but a private citizen now. If he wants to schmooze off the record with people whom he has never met before, I see no ethical problem here on either side.

“Off-the-record” is a two-way street. The speaker does not get to have his/her ideas aired in public, and the hearers do not get to air it. So both sides give up something for something else they both want — a chance to talk openly.

Does Clinton have a political agenda? You bet, because he is political to the marrow. Therefore it is up to the attendees to decide before hand whether they are willing to attend an off-the-record chitchat, not demand that the host go on the record after they accept the invitation.

This made my day. I send Schumer links all the time with no sign of uptake. This Chuckie’s in love with $omething else.

Bill on the other hand. There’s potential! Not that we need it, but a recent study of presidents ranked him (and JFK) at 82 on “openness to experience, a cognitive proclivity that encompasses unusual receptiveness to fantasy, aesthetics, actions, ideas and values.” This gives you what to work with, so I’m optimistic.

(Btw, George “Internets” Bush scored zero on this range. Lincoln was at 95 and Jefferson at 99.1. Imagine a meeting with TJ or the Railsplitter!)

Sorry about the saline thing, but your hair looked great in the earlier photo. That’s saying something because it’s been a bad hair summer in NY, with more rain-postponed games than in any baseball season in memory. (The Mets and Yankees are both building new parks, neither with retractable roofs. Someone in their front offices needs to see An Inconvenient Truth.)

I’m w/ Norske on the co-option potential here, and as robert feinman mentions, the use of ‘off the record’ is one way to start that ball rolling. Perhaps I’m too sick of all the secrecy in the Bush administration, but remember, we don’t want to be like them.

Also remember that there are many practices that have been abused by the Bush administration, and that doesn’t make them bad in themselves. Blame the worker, not the tool. It’s worthwhile to be careful, but there’s nothing inherently bad about off-the-record conversations if used appropriately.

Mary at 78 is right. My fear is that the leftosphere will try to copy the right wing wurlitzer with complete synchronicity with the political party. That would be antithetical to everything I care about.

fahrender — I assume at all times that the White House and OVP have us ALL monitored. The timing of certain VRWC actions in advance of key events suggest they know more than the average external bystander knows, and it happens all too often. (See the recent Armitage stuff: what did they telegraph in advance?)

But there’s a limit to how much action they can take with any info they’ve gathered, particularly with an event that has been labeled in part as off-the-record. If info comes out and it didn’t come from any of the bloggers in attendance…well?

That’s one more key reason why some amount of info that is off-the-record in sessions between individuals is not a problem. Call it entrapment if you like, but evesdropping is an invasion of privacy. And catching them at it? Heh.

WRT the willingness of bloggers to provide research, AMEN, Christy. I have a recent experience to share. The local NPR station did a report on the macaca incident. The story that aired was incomplete so I called the station to express my opinion. I reached the news guy and respectfully told him the reason for the call and explained that a quick internet search revealed the derivation of the ethnic slur used as well as other relevant facts, and that he might want to update his story. I offered to email him background information. Next came the scolding of my life! Railing that he was the writer, editor and producer as well as the reader of the news and that he did not have the luxury of time to look up things; he got in a couple of cracks about the internet and google and sneered when I mentioned blogs. After a lot of huffing and puffing he basically told me he reads whatever he gets from the AP. He suggested that I get a copy of the local paper if I was interested in more information about the story. Funny, because that is where he gets the information that he reads on air.

Silly old me, I thought journalists did research! I’ve learned since that exchange and from talking to newspaper folks that apparently only investigative journalists actually have the luxury of doing their own digging. Who knew?

Your meeting with Clinton is a really important and positive move. The old entrenched farts can’t stick their fingers in their ears and go la-la-la much longer and expect to survive.

I can see some distrust and wariness, but it would be so easy for them to begin to pick up on some synergy from the blogs without necessarily locking themselves in to “on the record” exchanges that they worry may come back and haunt them later or be provocative if publicized.

Sending out some topics at intervals and having bloggers send responses – just as a data sampling, not as a locked set of position points; keeping a list of expertise for quick research etc.

I’m very glad you mentioned the fact that a different set of talking heads is needed for the shows. Plus – you guys take great pictures.

A bit of distrust and wariness is healthy. Like their SHOULD be between the 3 branches of the fed gov or even between the states and DC.

Having said that, it is unconsciounable that the DLCC types continue to hurl insults at the blogs — who are really just a loose network of *good* citizens, who are willing to participate in a democratic process.

Ney, R-Ohio, who for months had defiantly denied any wrongdoing, said he was “very sorry for the pain” he has caused. Now he faces up to 10 years in prison. The Justice Department said prosecutors will recommend that he serve 27 months based on federal sentencing guidelines.

snip

Ney signed the plea agreement Wednesday, but it was not approved by the Justice Department or filed with the U.S. court until Friday.

Bloggers represent the public, and therefore there should be no secrets.

Next time such a situation comes up excuse yourselves from that portion of the meeting or demand that everything be public.

Run that one by me again, wouldja?

Bloggers represent themselves. They don’t take polls to decide what to do. They weren’t elected to represent you or me. They write what they wanna write and they hope we like it.

Jane Hamsher, in many ways, risked her online reputation when she bet on Ned Lamont. She did it for ALL the right reasons, but if Ned had lost, the ridicule would have been severe. Since Jane won the gamble she gets the rewards, some of which may have included the opportunity to sit with President Clinton and speak her mind. On or off the record.

Mary at 78 is right. My fear is that the leftosphere will try to copy the right wing wurlitzer with complete synchronicity with the political party. That would be antithetical to everything I care about.

Heh. I only fear them trying that because of how spectacularly it would fail, wasting valuable resources in the process. I think perhaps the reason we’re frustrating to Schumer et al. is that the initial lesson they took from the Dean campaign is that we were just a fundraising and message machine, and to their surprise it didn’t work when they tried to use us that way.

And something I don’t expect the dinosaur “leaders” to even begin to understand is that we’re evolving on Internet time, and we’re not what we were even a year ago. (Don’t tell them we mammals are eating their eggs!)

I see no reason why any part of a meeting like this should be off the record. Giving people “private” information is the easiest way to start to co-opt them. It is a pattern the the mainstream media has gotten into and they get played all the time because of it.

Let’s not fall into this trap. Once you hear something off the record you then need to self-censor yourself ever after. Bloggers represent the public, and therefore their should be no secrets.

Next time such a situation comes up excuse yourselves from that portion of the meeting or demand that everything be public.

I think this is a bit harsh. Clinton is not a public official but a private citizen now. If he wants to schmooze off the record with people whom he has never met before, I see no ethical problem here on either side.

“Off-the-record” is a two-way street. The speaker does not get to have his/her ideas aired in public, and the hearers do not get to air it. So both sides give up something for something else they both want — a chance to talk openly.

Does Clinton have a political agenda? You bet, because he is political to the marrow. Therefore it is up to the attendees to decide before hand whether they are willing to attend an off-the-record chitchat, not demand that the host go on the record after they accept the invitation.

why are we having this conversation? do we just want to blog and do nothing else? politics is not for sissies or moralists. Big Dawg is the most powerful politician around. Bush needs the Cheney Administration PLUS Dobson and and Falwell and the MSM to be ANYTHING and it looks like he’s heading down the tubes anyway. Christy and Jane (us) are not going to put up with anything that will compromise what we stand for. Next?

Mary at 78 is right. My fear is that the leftosphere will try to copy the right wing wurlitzer with complete synchronicity with the political party. That would be antithetical to everything I care about.

Heh. I only fear them trying that because of how spectacularly it would fail, wasting valuable resources in the process. I think perhaps the reason we’re frustrating to Schumer et al. is that the initial lesson they took from the Dean campaign is that we were just a fundraising and message machine, and to their surprise it didn’t work when they tried to use us that way.

And something I don’t expect the dinosaur “leaders” to even begin to understand is that we’re evolving on Internet time, and we’re not what we were even a year ago. (Don’t tell them we mammals are eating their eggs!)

Ney agreed to plead guilty to making false statements and conspiracy to commit “wire and mail fraud,” make false statements and violate post-employment restrictions for former congressional staff members.

I don’t think they got cooperation. Do you, Christy?

And I think there’s a duplicate charge in the journalist’s posting, but maybe I don’t understand it. ??

The meeting was a great step forward and I sense (hope) it is the beginning of a synergistic instead atagonistic relationship with the Dem brass. There are a lot of old schoolers with private agendas and a lot of money trying to maintain the status quo but sooner or later the dam is going to break. This is a very positive “crack”. I’m sure glad FDL was represented so well.

WRT to public/private nature of the meeting. I see absolutely NO reason why this meeting should be a matter of public record. I think establishing trust, getting to know one another, etc. is very important in a meeting such as this. The need for candor goes hand in hand. While I realize the fear of cooption is rife, I also think it unrealistic given the make-up of the citizenry of Blogistan. I’m much more willing to say that I trust most of the ambassadors and encourage more of the same.

In sum, this is a necessary, important and VITAL reaching out from disparate ends of the continuum. The participants must be able to speak freely and with candor. This is NOT a meeting of public, government officials. I look forward to more of the same.

I can’t tell from the coverage — it appears, by the use of the future tense, that the 27 month sentence is what the Government will recommend (at a future sentencing hearing). Ney really needs to be at his sentencing, and I doubt we will know whether there is a cooperation agreement until then.

At this site, we do a great deal of strategic thinking and discussion offline. We think about how to advance the progressive movement, which, if there is such a thing as our “client,” broadly speaking, that’s it.

This meeting served a purpose on behalf of our client, so Jane and Christy attended. I declined to attend, but not because I thought it was not worth doing or somehow a tainted endeavor. For my part, I’m crafting my own chosen niche in movement development and politics and it does not include being one of the big names and faces out there.

Having private conversations does not necessitate nefarious purpose. Privacy is frequently a precondition for candor, and a medium through which trust networks can be developed. Building a movement means sticking to your principles while finding willing allies.

The character of the people involved dictates what happens in those private spaces. I’ve worked with Jane and Christy closely for some time, and I have no fear of their being coopted or seduced by celebrity. Celebrity is a tool than can be used well or not, and they can handle it.

Great piece here. I always thought Clinton was smart enough to recognize the power of blogs.

Speaking of Clinton, here’s my question to David Broder today at the WaPo chat:

Mr. Broder, you recently argued that many in the media owed Karl Rove an apology, because we now know that the worst Mr. Rove might have done in the Valerie Plame case was to have misled prosecutors about a deed that was not itself a crime. If you feel this way now, then why were you so critical of Bill Clinton for misleading lawyers about a deed that was not itself a crime? Or do you now feel you owe Bill Clinton an apology? If not, then why not?

robertdfeinman at 75 — well, thanks for sharing but you’ll pardon me if I live in the real world where blabbing every little thing can give the other side an advantage that I’d rather not give them, given they already have a massive messaging advantage as it is. Nothing that was said in the off the record portion came as a surprise to me, but it still is not something that should be blabbed around because, well, sometimes discussions about strategic options or personal opinions about individual public figures or whatever the issue that is publicly controversial — it’s good to be able to have a frank, open, honest discussion instead of couching everything in public, masked language and talking in code. I do enough deciphering between the lines of NYTimes and WaPo article quotes as it is.

Jeebus, this isn’t some sort of tin foil hat meeting where we all bow down and vow to do everything Clinton tells us to do, for hell’s sakes. Every blogger in that room was a strong, professional individual who had their eyes wide open. They would not have invited us otherwise, frankly, because they don’t need to bother with the full treatment for sycophants. This was a fairly frank discussion for a first step — but it was just a first step. And there will be more off the record portions of discussion with people in the future — because it is simply how things work. Period. But neither Jane nor I plan on handing over the keys any time soon — we both like driving, thank you very much.

To your point, Christy, ed Gillespie was on The Daily Show this week talking about the fact the in the ‘04 presidential campaign, the people on the Kerry team couldn’t could their traps shut and gave away their strategy almost daily. If ever there was a time to keep a few things close to your chest, this is it.

Oh SCORE! Reporting to you from 40,000 feet up in the air. From here everything looks fine!

Thoughts re Powell and others [even here for that matter] who are slowly coming to realize the depths of evil in this administration: be kind to those who are changing their minds in favor of the truth. It is painful and humiliating.

As I talk with people about politics, especially men, I observe they are struggling with a kind of shame that they were so wrong about what’s going on with our nation. We can help them along by being gentle and loving as they begin to surface from this sea of lies.

Each new revelation is painful. They are stealing money that our troops need=body armor. They lied us into war. We declared war on a country not associated with 9/11. They are stealing elections. They callously used the deaths of 9/11 to take away our civil freedoms. They knew there would be an attack from the presidential bulletin of August 2001. I am willing to go further in this line of logic but will stifle to spare dissent.

WE ARE A WOUNDED NATION. Let’s be kind and gentle to each other as we mutually discover the depths of evil of this government.

TAKE ACTION! SAVE THE CHILDREN! EVERYONE CAN DO SOMETHING! Even if we are going down, take action on behalf of the survivors. They will be bewildered. Teach them and help them understand why their country died, or almost died.

I’m very happy that Jane and Christy were able to meet with all the bloggers in attendance, as well as Bill Clinton. Clinton is big name and the reason they gathered, but it is the gathering that is most important since these folks work in a loosely joined network and work in tandem on promoting core democratic (little d) values without a lot of infrastructure to unite and aide them.

I get the sense that this was “prairie dogging” for the Big Dog, popping up to take a look-see. That’s okay, he’s got to start somewhere and how great for him that he has the pull to bring bloggers together to do so.

And now off to take back my country at the local Democratic organization office…don’t forget to make time this weekend to do some door-to-door with your neighbors in your precinct. Check http://www.100actions.org to see what you can do this weekend and over the next 54 days until the election.

It is about the strategy that Daou and Hillary and others will employ to TRY to co-opt as many as possible. Being allowed access to power is the most pernicious force in the universe. Worse even than gravity (speaking as one old enough to observe its effect on my aging frame.)

Any good lawyer knows that there’s a huge difference between appropriate confidentiality and manipulative secrecy. I’m guessing that this group of bloggers would never have been invited if Clinton was interested in the latter.

Think about Christy’s constant refrain about the “off-the-record” grand jury testimony that Fitz can’t/won’t talk about publicly. Think about the ways in which privacy is respected around FDL, at the direction of the hostesses. And if that’s not enough, think about the anger that comes from the hostesses and commentors directed at those who try to manipulate and twist things using anonymous sources.

Would you try to maipulate Christy, Jane, and the rest of that group by using access as a carrot? That’s a powerful lineup you’d be facing there, and to borrow from Dirty Harry, You’ve got to ask yourself one question: ‘Do I feel lucky?’ . . .

I think not.

There are times and places for confidential, private conversations, and if this was one of those, I trust Christy and Jane to handle those things expressed in confidence appropriately. They’ve demonstrated that here time and time again, and I have no doubt they will continue to do so in the future.

There was a lively discussion going on at Steve Gilliard on the oddity of “all white” photos at a Clinton – Clinton, for God’s sake -event. I am sure Clinton must have observed it himself at the event and has probably asked his staff about it later.

Scarecrow/Lotus – thank you for the NYT link. The last month or so, their editorial page seems to have re-discovered America.

It sounds like the sources are pretty good about the arm twisting given to top JAG. And finally the NYT – about the only source (even the excellent threads at Balkinization don’t mention this much) to mention that a lot of the people at GITMO – not really terrorists; not really guilty of any war crimes; may not fall under any of the defintions normal people would use in looking at “enemy combatants” etc.

The idea that the nation’s chief executive is pressing so hard to undermine basic standards of justice is shocking. And any argument that these extreme methods would be used only against the most dangerous of international terrorists has been destroyed by the handling of hundreds of prisoners at Guantnamo Bay, many of whom appear to have been scooped up in Afghanistan years ago with little attempt to verify any connection to terrorism, and now are in danger of lingering behind bars forever without a day in court.

Because we have screwed up so much (that “who needs evidence when you’ve got gut; who needs translators and objective standards when you’ve got warlords and bounties) there is no way to call many of the people there illegal combatants of any sort, under any form of laws of war. So the approach (and even the McCain effort does this) is to make such a horribly broad definition of who might be called an “enemy combatant” as to open the door for anyone – people generally protected by the Geneva Conventions as civilians, and people who are American Citizens, in America, who are now going to have the Padilla “would have had Constitutional rights, if I hadn’t decided to take them away” practice codified.

The law should cover actual terrorists and those who engage in hostilities against American forces outside an army or organized resistance group. But the White House bill also includes anyone who gives “material support” to a terrorist group or anyone affiliated with a terrorist group. Legal experts fear this definition could cover people who, for example, contribute to charities without knowing they support terrorist groups, or that are not identified as terrorist fronts until later. It could be used to arrest a legal resident of the United States and put him before a military commission.

They also mention that it can be used to kidnap citizens from their native countries and some of those countries aren’t crazy about that concept. What they don’t mention, specifically, is that just because WE pass legislation that says it is ok to go commit crimes in other countries — that doesn’t mean THEY have to agree. Indictments in Italy anyone? It’s not opening up troops for violations of the Geneva Conventions that is the central issue – it is opening up troops, CIA agent and anyone inolved in criminal charges across the world.

The nation is in this hideous mess because Mr. Bush ignored the advice of people like [JAG, military officers, etc. who testified] when he tried to set up prison camps beyond the reach of the law. It’s hard to believe their warnings will be ignored again, but the signs are ominous. Last week, the military’s top lawyers told the House Armed Services Committee that they strongly opposed the rules of evidence and other due-process clauses in the White House’s bill. The committee just went ahead and passed it anyway. Only eight of the 28 Democratic members had the courage to vote “no.”

Hear any voices from those in DOJ who pushed through Padilla? Nope. Any voices from those who have argued that the US President just plain doesn’t have to follow any international conventions or laws of any kinds? Nope.

Guess what – that cuts other ways as well. If our law doesn’t require that nations abide by laws, then how is Iraq bound by the waiver rules there? Can’t they start rounding up and hanging or applying Sharia to any Americans they find and isn’t that, under out own theory of how international law works “legal”?

America as a state sponsor of torture – Ashcroft, Gonzales & Co. should all get thank you cards. We couldn’t have made it there without them.

when i was in Moscow Bush 41 came there, Clinton also (several years later). Both spoke in the gym at the embassy. I didn’t go near GHW but i shook Big Dawg’s hand. ask him a question and he stood there and answered it. (i, a faceless peon). absolutely, he listens. it doesn’t matter who you are. he’s listening and thinking.

If G. H. W. Bush invited you to New York for a one-hour meeting, would you go?

If not, why not?

Yeah, sure. I mean, he’s a pretty small figure in his party compared to the influence Clinton or Carter have in theirs, but I’d sure like the chance to ask him if his brand of sane Republicans are planning to do anything to take their party back from the wingnuts, or if they’ve already tried and failed. And if they have given up, would they have the decency of publicly telling all those people of my father’s generation that their GOP isn’t coming back, and they don’t have to support the new one out of team loyalty any more.

My dog Jake tells me he’s not in awe of the Big Dog out there in NYC.
He reminded me this early am that that the fire in Firedoglake is
speaking Truth to Power no matter who or what the subject is.
I sure hope to hear more of the “Truth” that was spoken to Clinton
in that meeting.

Pach at 136 — thanks. I have to say, the whole “Jane and Christy will be controlled by the Clintonistas” line of thought cracks me up. The thought of anyone trying to control Jane is a hoot and a half…hehehehe. And you know me — try to push me into doing anything, and I’ll do the exact opposite just to spite your ass. *g* (That red hair does kick in on occasion…)

Speaking of off-the-record candor, I am dying to know if Jane brought up the fact that she and spazeboy were locked out of Clinton’s appearance for Lieberliar in CT. Not that I expect to ever know, but it is fun imagining such a conversation!

Oh SCORE! Reporting to you from 40,000 feet up in the air. From here everything looks fine!

Thoughts re Powell and others [even here for that matter] who are slowly coming to realize the depths of evil in this administration: be kind to those who are changing their minds in favor of the truth. It is painful and humiliating.

As I talk with people about politics, especially men, I observe they are struggling with a kind of shame that they were so wrong about what’s going on with our nation. We can help them along by being gentle and loving as they begin to surface from this sea of lies.

Each new revelation is painful. They are stealing money that our troops need=body armor. They lied us into war. We declared war on a country not associated with 9/11. They are stealing elections. They callously used the deaths of 9/11 to take away our civil freedoms. They knew there would be an attack from the presidential bulletin of August 2001. I am willing to go further in this line of logic but will stifle to spare dissent.

WE ARE A WOUNDED NATION. Let’s be kind and gentle to each other as we mutually discover the depths of evil of this government.

TAKE ACTION! SAVE THE CHILDREN! EVERYONE CAN DO SOMETHING! Even if we are going down, take action on behalf of the survivors. They will be bewildered. Teach them and help them understand why their country died, or almost died.

excellent advice, egregious! the more we allow republicans to admit their mistakes and possibly even change their voting habits the better. republican voters are not all idiots and monsters. some of them are very little different from us.

It gets worse, at least here in the Bay Area. Darth Cheney is flying in for a fundraiser on the Peninsula this afternoon, which is guaranteed to screw up the PM commute for folks there.

Leave it to Darth Cheney to further piss off every jazz fan heading down here to the 49th Monterey Jazz Festival opening weekend – with highway 101 unnecessarily clogged.

Heh. A couple of weeks ago, Bush was going down to George Allen’s home for a fundraiser, and apparently his people asked Virginia officials if they could close the carpool lanes of the main southbound highway from DC for six hours, including most of evening rush hour. (The state officials talked sense into them, and he took a helicopter.) These people don’t care how many peasants they trample on their rides; to them, we’re only here to shout their praises.

Here in Arnold’s world our CHP takes a lot of heat from we citizens when in fact they are just pawns made into stooges doing the bidding of money guys like Rupert Murdoch. Most recently Murdoch’s top secret power-fest/feast inside the gates of Pebble Beach drew Big Dawg, Bono, Al Gore but they were just window dressing for the real power moguls/mongers Murdoch cultivates stuck around for many more days – closing the Golden State’s legendary coastal highway One at the drop of a hat and no notice many times – day and night – so Murdoch & his pals could enjoy Cheney like security, i.e., cruising in caravans down the road to tented dinners at Carmel Mission, etc et al. VA sounds positively rational compared to what we hapless Californians endure when these mongrels…errrr…moguls descend in state.

OS — If you ever send an invite, I will certainly try to say yes! It actually gets more complicated — one of our alums, a Judge on the DC court, will also be receiving an honorary degree at the ceremony. Sadly, it is a Judge who decided that Gitmo detainees have no rights whatsoever. And he wrote his opinion AFTER Hamdan was decided. Jerk.

I’m very happy that Jane and Christy were able to meet with all the bloggers in attendance, as well as Bill Clinton. Clinton is big name and the reason they gathered, but it is the gathering that is most important since these folks work in a loosely joined network and work in tandem on promoting core democratic (little d) values without a lot of infrastructure to unite and aide them.

I get the sense that this was “prairie dogging” for the Big Dog, popping up to take a look-see. That’s okay, he’s got to start
somewhere and how great for him that he has the pull to bring bloggers together to do so.

And now off to take back my country at the local Democratic organization office…don’t forget to make time this weekend to do some door-to-door with your neighbors in your precinct. Check http://www.100actions.org to see what you can do this weekend and over the next 54 days until the election.

Take a pill brother… cooptation, like shit, happens. Nobody is doubting or questioning Jane’s or Christy’s integrity or committment to the truth. This IS the real world and the way the rich and powerful stay rich and powerful is by co-opting (or destroying) the truth tellers and disseminators. “Off the record” is, to me, dangerous to anyone involved in acquiring and disseminating the truth…I think that we can trace the demise of effective, professional journalism (as opposed to propaganda pushing) to the proliferation of “unnamed sources” and the killing of the truth by off the record inoculations.

WADR, I don’t think this discussion (off-the-record meeting w/Clinton) is a sidetrip at all but central to the theme of this thread as well as political blogging in general. As political blogging expands its influence, there will be occasions for closer contact with the very objects of the blogs’ interest: live meetings with politicians and ex-politicians who still have clout.

How the blogs handle this is to some extent an experimental and trial-and-error process. The meeting with Clinton is a prominent example. And Pach himself gave a very useful insight into one blogger’s process in arriving at his own decision.

This is the way it should be: bloggers will need to find a way to balance their obligations and interests, and hope they land on the side of the angels.

I hear you about pernicious access. The neo-liberals are trying to figure out how to co-opt the blogsphere. But this is fantastic progress. Jane and Redd got to meet with one of the smartest and most effective leaders of the 20th century. And FDL has existed for, what…2 years? What’s next? 2 years from now Jane and Redd will probably be attending the meetings of the Bilderberg Group. ;-)

The thing I miss must about BigDawg is that active listening you describe, Christy — the info-sponging he does as necessarily as air-breathing. I know he took it to a fault in the Oval (remember that story about Gore bursting out at him one time in front of others, “Goddammit, make up your mind!”?).

But to have that kind of open, questing, resource-seeking, analytical mind again steering the USofA — ah god, if we don’t get that again soon, the consequences don’t bear thinking about.

Geez some a you folks ken really bring it…that’s really what it’s all about,isn’t it? It’s not just “balancing obligations and interests”, but continually defining and redefining the interests, obligations AND responsibilities to the truth.

Corrine at 46 — there were also several people who appeared by phone. The meeting was put together in a week and a half’s time (I barely was able to coordinate travel plans and The Peanut, frankly, because Mr. ReddHedd had to rearrange his schedule at the last minute.) There were a number of female bloggers physically there, which was great — Kos couldn’t make it because of prior commitments, and I know there were others who were also invited who couldn’t make it either. So don’t make assumptions based solely on four photos that I pulled — especially when I don’t have complete information on who was on the call (John Amato from C&L and Glenn Greenwald were on, I know, but I’m not certain if and who others might have been.). For a first meeting put together on the fly, I thought Peter put together a great group of people who were very passionate about the issues and willing to speak their minds. And I’m certain, if there are more meetings in the future, that others will be included.

I’m not making any assumptions–I wasn’t there. But I look at the picture and wonder what’s going on? It’s a legitimate question.

Corinne at 181 – I’m not saying it’s not a legitimate question, I’m just saying that I’m not certain who, if anyone else, may have been on the call — or who may have been invited and couldn’t make it. Peter would be a better person to ask about that, I should think.

I would also add, parenthetically, Steve Gilliard would not have attended if invited (I know this for a fact). He sees himself as an independent journalist and not as one to communicate with campaigns or pols. That’s his niche, his mission, and he does it exceedingly well.

I’m not saying bloggers are categorically immune to the undercurrents of human nature that might lead some to lose focus. Of course not.

Those of us most dedicated in this work to causes larger than ourselves are less vulnerable, and any whose primary agenda may be fame or the feeling of being important are more vulnerable. I am also saying I have no worries about such vulnerabilities for Christy or Jane.

Peter Daou himself, by the way, is Lebanese American, though the larger point, that leading netroots voices underrepresent people of color is I think valid.

In my view, this seems to be because there is not as strong an online base of people of color to help propel voices from communities of color to the forefront. This in turn is sustained in part by systemic disadvantages endemic to our society, which we collectively in the netroots are working to address.

We’d like, for example, to promote public wireless access to facilitate online involvement in urban areas, among other things. If we can get Democrats elected, we hope to work on this and more. It’s one of the reasons we worked hard to build ties with Maxine Waters when she was in Connecticut stumping for Lamont.

FROM THE SAN FRANCISCO AIRPORT
Highway 101 North to Highway 380 West to Highway 280 South. Continue 280 to Sand Hill Road (travel time about 20 minutes). Exit Sand Hill Road East. Left at the first stop light and continue through the second light then make an immediate left. **Follow this road around to the right through a residential area. Pass through two brick pillars saying 3000 Sand Hill Road. Left at the second road. Building 4 will be on your immediate left.
FROM THE SAN JOSE AIRPORT
Highway 880 South toward Santa Cruz (about 2 miles) to Highway 280 North toward San Francisco. Continue 280 to Sand Hill Road (about 12-14 miles). Exit Sand Hill Road East. Continue through first and second light, then make an immediate left. **Follow above.
FROM HIGHWAY 101
Take the University Avenue exit West. Continue on University through a residential district, then a business district. (University becomes Palm Drive when it intersects El Camino Real). Turn right at Arboretum. Turn left at Sand Hill Road. Continue West on Sand Hill for about ten minutes to Sand Hill Circle (this will be the last light before Highway 280). Right at this stop light, then an immediate left. **Follow above.

I guess I should be clear why I harbor such antipathy toward Clinton. It starts with one simple thing: NAFTA. How any Democratic president could champion such a shiv to the heart of the working class totally eludes me. That was his signal to the Republicans that he could be bullied ever further to the right — that he had no bedrock Democratic principles from which he would not budge. And they damn sure seized the initiative from there.

I don’t think we would be in this mess with Bush today if it weren’t for Clinton’s triangulation disaster. I’m in no mood yet to forgive. (Carter, I can forgive. Not Clinton, not yet.)

I’m less concerned with the off-the-record nature of the meeting than with the fact that a meeting was held in Harlem, yet no African-American bloggers were invited (even though the most prominent black political blogger, Steve Gilliard, lives in New York). That was, um, surprising.

Now, it is true that Steve Gilliard refuses as a matter of principle to do off-the-record meetings with politicians. But it’s not like there aren’t a number of other potential invitees.

Maybe someone has already asked this question up above, but just in case….

Did anybody ask Big Dawg why he is not more vocal on attacking the Anti-America, Anti-Constitution, Anti-Geneva Conventions, criminal nature of the republican agenda? He might be THE most highly respected Democrat in the land. His words carry very heavy weight. Yet he is largely silent on all the shit that has been thrust upon America by the fuckheads on the right. We all complain about how the Dems lack a single unifying voice…and then we are starstruck in the presence of Big Dawg (including, and especially me – if I ever met the Big Guy!).

C’mon Big Dawg – you da Man. Speak Up and Speak Out. Speak to the Truth. Lead us like the Leader we are desperate for. America NEEDS you more than ever. Before it’s too late.

Timewarp @ 20….Harry Reid’s voice. Can’t anything be done to fix it? Vocal lessons? Something? How many thousands of people does he turn off from the Democratic Party?

Maybe it’s just me….but I can’t stand to listen to him. Don’t we have Orator Classes anymore?

I know a lot of calculations went into the decision to promote him to Dem Minority Leader (from Utah, religious man with mainstream values, solid Dem credentials), and he can be well spoken and effective on occasion. But with what we are up against, it’s so important to have a dynamic, energetic and appealing party representative who can make people sit up and take notice. Personally, I think Kerry or Clinton would make great Majority/Minority Leader.

I’m less concerned with the off-the-record nature of the meeting than with the fact that a meeting was held in Harlem, yet no African-American bloggers were invited (even though the most prominent black political blogger, Steve Gilliard, lives in New York).

I’m so glad to see some thawing between the bloggers (and blog readers, by extension) and the party entrenchees. There has seemed to be an artificial “war” where our observations, information, and labor are brushed off with a “shut up and stick to voting and donating”.

You’re so right that the effort against “The Path to 9/11″ was a beautiful example of concerted effort.

And leave it to Big Dog to see the light and take action. I view it as a very hopeful sign!

I follow the lib blogs very closely. And I have NEVER seen ANY suggestion, even in the most remote sense possible, that we are against the Dem party. Nothing could be further from the truth. Yet you so rightly point out that the Dems simply disrespect the blogoshpere. The Dem party needs to get their heads out of their asses and realize that we are on THE SAME PAGE as them, and we should be working in COLLABERATION.

Everybody marvels at the grass-roots system the repubs have created. But the blogosphere is a similar grass-roots system that is currently in place and waiting for a suitor to pair up with. Like the pretty girl sitting alone at the dance, just waiting for someone to ask her to dance. We WANT to dance, yet the Dem party treats up like the undesirable.

Interesting piece on Big Dog in the New Yorker that just hit the mailboxes yesterday. A couple of times Clinton was portrayed as pained that Dems are not fighting back harder — have not absorbed the Swift Boating and other lessons administered in recent elections — are not speaking with one voice against the many and varied outrages of the Bush/GOP hegemony.

Also portrayed was the tightrope he faces vis-a-vis Hillary’s possible run, his role and public persona, his views vs hers, avoiding muddying the waters/using up the oxygen, etc etc.

Which leads me to the conclusion that if there was ever a historical moment for Hillary to quit triangulating and to forcefully take a leadership role in the party and on the national stage… that time is NOW. She is among the small handful of Dems who can get the face time on the talk shows and the column inches in the press to aggressively press the attack against the GOP’s neo-fascist agenda.

This is a world-historical tipping point… will our leaders brood and dither, or will they rally the troops and join the battle to save our Nation?

darkblack at 191 — thanks — I missed that update from Liza this morning. Appreciate you linking it in the comments, as I thought that Peter would have invited a number of folks to this meet and greet. It was really a scramble for me to get there, and I assumed that a number of other folks just couldn’t pivot their schedules to make it. It’s good to know that Oliver was invited. :)

Also portrayed was the tightrope he faces vis-a-vis Hillary’s possible run, his role and public persona, his views vs hers, avoiding muddying the waters/using up the oxygen, etc etc.

[snip]

She is among the small handful of Dems who can get the face time on the talk shows and the column inches in the press to aggressively press the attack against the GOP’s neo-fascist agenda.

This is a world-historical tipping point… will our leaders brood and dither, or will they rally the troops and join the battle to save our Nation?

Eddy

Eddy (nominally) and Big Dog – specifically (damn – I kill this word every time I try to write it):

Big Dog – there is PLENTY of oxygen out here in beautiful Scottsdale, AZ. If you are concerned about stepping on Hillary’s toes in NY (and I understand if you are concerned), then come out here for a few days. On me. Stay at my house, we can talk American-to-American. And Hillary’s toes will be several thousand miles away. I’d like to talk to you about a bunch of things that America needs & wants. You are in the unique position of being able to do something about what’s happening to America. Let’s get together & talk. In private. Indeed: This is a world-historical tipping point…

Christy — Thanks for that report. Read it with sheer gratitude for you and your blog colleagues who work so hard at this and spend enormous amounts of time and your own money doing it — Seriously.

The big Dawg (I met him twice and was totally impressed, not with his grasp of the issues — but his grasp of reality! He gets it!) was just lain smart to call this mtg and give you folks a “good on ya!” for supporting the D party despite the LAME leadership in DC!!

Rayne, If you check back months, you’ll see I was a more frequent commenter but work seemed to take over and as such I only had time for lurking. If you’re going to impose a “have to comment x times to be taken seriously” then I’d like to have that stated up front.

As someone who was a political appointee in the Carter administration, I know well how the cult of celebrity works. I just don’t want to see the glitter of stardom cause temporary blindness in those who I have read and supported over the past years.

Clinton is a smart guy. But he is not the entirety of the party or our nation. And he has his own blind spots and weaknesses.

I really get concerned that there were promises of confidentiality exacted this early on. For criminies sake it was a first meeting with more than 5 attendees. It was as subtle an attempt at co-option as I’ve seen lately, but again Clinton is one smart guy, and he uses his charisma very, very effectively.

Only time will tell how sincere the Dems really are in regards to uniting with Blogs in a common effort (I’m sure the big-money consultants HATE HATE HATE Blogs for the competition you provide at practically NO COST).

But the bigtime, big$$$$ consultants have proven to be hopeless failures most of the time, so I can understand their fears.

In the long run, the Blogs will triumph, or the Democratic Party is toast in the face of GOP lies, smears and corporate resources.

Did anybody ask Big Dawg why he is not more vocal on attacking the Anti-America, Anti-Constitution, Anti-Geneva Conventions, criminal nature of the republican agenda? He might be THE most highly respected Democrat in the land. His words carry very heavy weight. Yet he is largely silent on all the shit that has been thrust upon America by the fuckheads on the right. We all complain about how the Dems lack a single unifying voice…and then we are starstruck in the presence of Big Dawg (including, and especially me – if I ever met the Big Guy!).

C’mon Big Dawg – you da Man. Speak Up and Speak Out. Speak to the Truth. Lead us like the Leader we are desperate for. America NEEDS you more than ever. Before it’s too late.

But I disagree that he should mount up and ride in a la White Knight, or that we should even want him to.

He’s had all the Presidency he ever can, and should he visibly and heavily step back into U.S. politics at this point, he’d only diminish himself, us, and — most importantly — our rising crop of possible nominees. That’s why Ex-Presidents (especially larger-than-life legends like Nixon and Clinton) busy themselves or rest according to their abilities and interests, but never ever try to crowd up to the front again.

Cujo at 204 — I was hoping to have the transcript so that I could give you guys some quotes, but we haven’t gotten it yet. So I decided doing a quick write-up and supplementing later if I’d forgotten something would be more useful. I should have taken notes, but with the lunch and all, it was a little difficult to manage a legal pad and baked sweet potato fries at the same time. *g*

I’m a little late to this party. Question?, now that that we know B.D. reads blogs – does he also read comments? I am always amazed at the articulate, well-reasoned comments from the ordinary folks. Maybe he is too. The earlier question about a B.D. nom-de-plume is perfect.
What a concept! Wouldn’t that be fun!

I would like to remind everybody that it was Ned Lamont who held the first press conference with John Edwards that was only open to bloggers (to which I, ahem, cough – was asked to participate in).
To wit:

“The candidate, Democrat John Edwards, did squeeze in one private meeting with perceived powerbrokers. In a Yale medical school cafeteria, Edwards glad-handed, praised and answered questions from Connecticut’s local bloggers.”

I’m late getting here and I skipped over most of the comments so forgive if someone has brought this up.

The short:

I’ve always been a diehard supporter of Bill’s until recently when it seemed that he aligned himself with the Bushes… I am concerned that he is a part of a bigger picture with regard to a power structure in the world that we rarely see talked about. (No tin foilhat here just keeping my eyes open.) I’ve seen this touched upon from time-to-time but not really addressed. I know Bill could be a big asset to our cause but we don’t need to fall all over ourselves assuming that his involvement is totally benign.

Hey, an Intellectually Curious, Open-minded President!!! He needs to use his influence to give voice to all of us shut out of cable/broadcast media. He understands RISK, and that you reduce exposure and mitigate your risk by thorough preparation and absolute focus, and he isn’t afraid to throw the dice…

Go Big Dawg.

(I still can’t imagine any other President – current or former – who would ask to meet and listen to bloggers…)

I am not particularly concerned about co-option so long as blogs have comments, and if the comments start going south, the actual cost of a start-up is not beyond reach. I suspect most who comment know what a sell-out might look like.

I am also not concerned with off-the-record, so long as the fact that some materials are off the record is known. I would suspect that Clinton wants to know how to “build influential blogs” and what they might need given the costs of technology, (techs who fix glitches, more and faster servers, bandwidth, etc.,) and he might be interested in seeing whether he can provoke needed help. As long as the potential strings are understood, help should not be scorned.

I think the model of doing back office research for spokespersons, and perhaps having some critical influence on who is a spokesperson is something Blogs should take up. Between 1990 and 2002 I played such a role with Paul Wellstone, along with about 25-30 other Wellstonians who just happened to be big public policy and history readers. What we did was read, critique, and comment on books, academic articles, popular press articles — bringing them to Paul’s attention, and trying to write those short pieces in line with subjects being debated in the Senate, or where he had speaking engagements. It was a delight to do it — all you needed to do was keep in mind the question — Given what interests Paul right now, is there anything of value in this article, book, academic article, and how can I boil the fact, the argument down into his style? No one had a monoply on this — people read in terms of their own expertise and interest, but just once in a while you would hear your words on the Senate Floor and it would be great. I suspect the Blogostan is full of people who would do the same if they knew their effort didn’t instantly hit the round filing cabinet. (Just imagine Emptywheel, Jane, Christy and many others here offering House Judiciary Committee members sample lines of questions for a Plame Investigation?)

Clinton is an exception to the rule — he actually reads whole books. But also remember the Q and A from Mondale’s exit interview on TV when the Carter Administration was over. He was asked what was the first thing he would do in private life, and he answered, He wanted to finally have the time to sit down and read some whole books. The Senate and the Vice Presidency did not allow time for that. If Bloggers can retain enough diversity and at the same time organize clear relationships with spokespersons (elected and otherwise) it could be most fruitfull. And Wellstone was not the first Senator who had this kind of relationship with “friendly readers” — my Neighbor played the same role vis a vis childrens’ mental health for both Humphrey and Mondale. And, there is nothing particularly wrong with taking points our pols take up — and making certain that far more elaborate versions of these issues are well covered in the blog essays — meaning that if well done, the MSM might do something on the same topic.